Today's Republican leadership seems to have an uncanny ability of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Why last week's healthcare summit was just another perfect example of not only such an event but also a testament to the pervasiveness of a "not getting it" state of mind.
And, while the Republicans seem to think the strategy to this healthcare issue is to scrap the president's proposal and go back to the drawing board. Regardless, were that even to occur what would come out of a fresh start would still have begun on a false premise.
The false premise of course is the notion that you can have healthcare "reform" while advocating a guaranteed issue and a community rating for preexisiting conditions.
For those not privy, what that means is that a person who has a preexisting condition who previously did not have insurance but now suddenly needs it cannot be denied. And, not only can that individual not be denied, they cannot be charged a higher premium.
So what's the problem with that you say??
Suppose you didn't want to carry homeowner's insurance because you simply thought it was too expensive. Now, let's say your house suddenly catches on fire do to an unattended pot on the stove. What might you suppose the insurance company would say were you to call them from the neighbor's house telling them that your house was currently on fire and that you needed insuarance to cover the damages??
Or, suppose you didn't have auto insurance and suddenly wound hit a patch of ice and smashed up your car alongside a guardrail?? Do you suppose Allstate would be there to pay your claim??
To be certain, the purpose of insurance is such that you are paying your monthly premium and adding it to the pool so that when something goes awry, there will be a fund on which to draw to pay out a claim. If someone doesn't pay into the pool but then finds they suddenly need to make a claim, from whence does the money come from??
Individuals with preexisting conditions can get health insurance. That is not the issue. What is at issue for those individuals is that it is more expensive as well it should be (get too many speeding tickets and you'll pay a higher premium for auto insurance right??) and they think you ought to subsidize the cost.
Seems most everyone wants one these days and by golly, there are just enough politicians to dole them out.
3 comments:
This goes to the larger problem with the GOP: They accept the premise that the left postulates, then tries to come up with policy that addresses the false premise, and they add the words "free market" to claim it's "conservative" rather than liberalism lite.
As for those who, as a practical matter, cannot obtain the insurance they may want or desperately need, they can be addressed in many ways (even if government was doing it) that will still be less expensive and less damaging to the health care system than trying to take the pseudo-free market system we have now and evolve it further toward government health care, rather than moving back toward an individual responsibility for health care (the only thing that will work).
Interesting analogies here.
Patrick said it so well in that first paragraph and I've been saying it for years. In the end everything tends towards liberalism and so conservatism just becomes liberalism-lite. This is apples and oranges but it's like when conservatives used to be critics of sexual harassment law but then got with the program once they found out Clinton has a crooked dick. Hey if you're consistent you're in an ever dwindling minority.
Post a Comment